Although there are many variations of the cycle where the drive to the device can be achieved by the use of arms, most of the previous inventions have pitfalls which make them rarely practical and some are overly complex in design making them commercially unappealing.
Here we will focus on designs where front wheel is propelled by the use of riders arms and upper body via handlebar cranks and crank wheel which are moving in a complete circular motion.
Designs where the arm propelled handlebar cranks are oriented 180 degrees relative to one other (as usually seen in leg powered devices) provide a good resistance for arms relative to one other so that the riders body can maintain in a consistent position in relation to the vehicle. However a very serious drawback of this design is that the steering function of the handlebars is severely compromised and steering becomes impossible and very dangerous should the rider try to do so at the moment when the crank arms are in a vertical position of their rotating cycle. In this position the vehicle becomes very unstable and any attempt to control it becomes counter intuitive and can generally result in a crash. The steering of the bicycles with the said 180 degree handlebar crank orientation is possible only in those moments when one crank is forward and the other backward, them both being aligned on a horizontal plane. (patents: U.S. Pat. No. 4,858,942, U.S. Pat. No. 564,099, U.S. Pat. No. 5,816,598, U.S. Pat. No. 597,348, U.S. Pat. No. 3,823,959)
One way to avoid this instability is to orient the opposing handlebar crank arms at 0 degrees relative to one another, so that the forces from the riders arms are always equal on both sides. This makes steering easy and the vehicle very stable.
However this introduces a new problem in itself. In this design as the rider pedals with their arms the rider does so in a circular motion where for the half of the stoke the rider is pushing the handlebar away from himself and for the other half of the motion he/she is pulling it towards himself/herself. When the rider uses the pushing motion he/she is also involuntarily pushing back their entire body in the opposite direction due to forces of action/reaction. The tendency for the body to move backwards in this part of stroke is generally resisted by the seat where the rider is resting most of his/her weight.
However when the rider is doing the second half of the stroke, and starts to PULL the handlebar towards their body, the rider's mass has a tendency to fly forward in reaction due to the same laws of physics.
This event causes an unpleasant feeling as the rider is swung severely over the handlebars and is also inefficient as the body keeps moving back and forth subsequently causing unnecessary opposing forces to travel through the bicycle and results in slowing the bicycle down on each half the stroke. It becomes an inefficient way to propel the bicycle with energy being wasted and the whole experience feeling uncomfortable. (patents: U.S. Pat. No. 3,193,305, U.S. Pat. No. 6,099,009, U.S. Pat. No. 595,501, US20100176571, U.S. Pat. No. 4,773,662, U.S. Pat. No. 6,264,224)
So something needs to be put in place that is secured to the bicycle and that the rider can pull against on the other half of the stroke.
Some previous standard bicycle designs (leg driven only) utilise a form of a pad solely as a means of a support for the rider to alleviate stress on arms and back. However all previous inventions are positioned in such a way which is undesirable to the function of the bicycle especially where the arms are also used for propulsion.
If the pad is positioned forward of the fork steerer tube (patents: U.S. Pat. No. 5,385,359, U.S. Pat. No. 6,098,493, U.S. Pat. No. 559,244, U.S. Pat. No. 5,326,122, U.S. Pat. No. 575,787, U.S. Pat. No. 2,229,778, U.S. Pat. No. 578,027) then putting the force of rider's weight against it can result in additional unwanted steering instability as the force is applied to the handlebars and exaggerated by the means of a lever when the bars are turned which could also counter the intended steering direction of the arms.
Positioning of the pad or support device on the frame's top tube, frame's down tube, seat post or any position behind the fork steerer tube (patents: U.S. Pat. No. 6,076,846, U.S. Pat. No. 5,383,677) is often not practical as it interferes with other desired functions of the rider such as cycling standing up. These mounting positions also don't provide any support to the bicycle's steering which means the arms must always be used on the handlebars. Dismounting the bicycle also becomes more difficult. These positions are also not in line with the current safety standards.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,820,151 shows some form of a pad (although it doesn't specify such in the claims), but the pad assembly relates to this specific design of bike and is mounted to a horizontal member which is clamped by a rear facing stem. This type of design is not practical as such stems are not used in conventional bikes and also the pads adjust-ability is severely limited as the length of the support posts to the pad is fixed. Using such a design is also not practical from a manufacturing view point as it can not be used with current existing fork steerers which are generally tubular and would require many specially made parts but is still unable to provide the desired function for use with hand driven cycles.
U.S. Pat. No. 684,821 and U.S. Pat. No. 551,814 show a form of shoulder braces which go a specific height to riders shoulders and are attached to the fork with intended function being the steering of the bicycle. However the described devices are not practical for manufacture and not practical for use on the current bicycle and invention described herein and would not solve the problems discussed previously. Their positioning, shape and where they contact the rider do not provide the sufficient resistance and support necessary for a hand propelled cycle described by the invention herein. Also the propulsion of these devices is to the rear wheel.